10 ms·

Yes. Because it feels like a blatant attack on alternative news sites and media sources, and makes me worry that any attempt to shut down fake news will be used

by CM30 8y ago

Yes. Because it feels like a blatant attack on alternative news sites and media sources, and makes me worry that any attempt to shut down fake news will be used to shut down real news that paints authorities or the mainstream media in a bad light. It makes me think of the debates about encryption backdoors and police master keys for security systems. In the same way a backdoor for the police/authorities can quickly become one for criminals and foreign agents, limits on news sites, media sharing or freedom of speech can become weapons of government or corporate oppression/censorship. Fake news can certainly be an issue, but it feels like any solution will just be another tool for incumbents to secure their power and freedoms to be restricted.

Moodles 8y ago
I'm not sure if it's a "blatant attack on alternative news sites". I think probably people actually have good intentions here rather than some establishment conspiracy. I'm not convinced that regulating social media news is the best policy to focus on, though.
- vowelless 8y ago
  > I think probably people actually have good intentions here. Everyone thinks that their own intentions are good.
  - Moodles 8y ago
    What are you trying to tell me? I'm just saying that my opinion is that I doubt this is some establishment conspiracy to make voters vote for them. I think the MPs are probably just trying to get rid of fake news right now. I certainly don't know how anyone can see this as a "blatant" attack. It certainly doesn't look blatant to me. It is at least plausible that they're trying to genuinely help without malicious intent.
- lesss365 8y ago
  It's a term blatantly used for censorship and blanket discrediting of sources of information, whether credible or not. It's popularity began with the Clinton campaign and was quickly adopted by GOP candidates Edit: By "it" I mean "fake news"

by CM30 8y ago

Moodles 8y ago

I'm not sure if it's a "blatant attack on alternative news sites". I think probably people actually have good intentions here rather than some establishment conspiracy. I'm not convinced that regulating social media news is the best policy to focus on, though.

vowelless 8y ago
> I think probably people actually have good intentions here. Everyone thinks that their own intentions are good.
- Moodles 8y ago
  What are you trying to tell me? I'm just saying that my opinion is that I doubt this is some establishment conspiracy to make voters vote for them. I think the MPs are probably just trying to get rid of fake news right now. I certainly don't know how anyone can see this as a "blatant" attack. It certainly doesn't look blatant to me. It is at least plausible that they're trying to genuinely help without malicious intent.
lesss365 8y ago
It's a term blatantly used for censorship and blanket discrediting of sources of information, whether credible or not. It's popularity began with the Clinton campaign and was quickly adopted by GOP candidates Edit: By "it" I mean "fake news"